lf1

Family Court Theater Presents: The Psychopath as “The Man Who Never Was”

Since the last round of my “Custody War” with Luc (my ex psychopath), I have thought a lot about the flaws in our legal system.  I run the events of the trials (“battles”) over and over in my head. I still can’t understand how such a disordered man like my ex can be allowed to have unsupervised access to a child.  I know it is not healthy to think about it so much, but I can’t help it when the thoughts creep into my head.  I keep trying to put my finger on why this process left me so incredibly disturbed.

Even after hearing disturbing testimony from several of Luc’s previous victims (who graciously agreed to testify against Luc during my Custody War), I couldn’t shake this feeling that I was looking at an empty human-like shell that slightly resembled the man I thought I loved.

The Analogy

During the opening and closing statements of my Custody War with Luc, my attorney described Luc as “The Man Who Never Was”.  As I am a child of the 80’s, I didn’t understand the reference my lawyer was making at first.  He explained to me that he had taken this phrase from the title of a 1956 film that was based on World War II.  In summary, the film was about “Operation Mincemeat”, which was a 1943 British Intelligence plan to deceive the Axis powers into thinking Operation Husky, the Allied Invasion of Sicily, would take place elsewhere.

(Stick with me here, I promise that this has relevance for even those non-history buffs.)

As part of this attempt to deceive the Axis powers, the operation involved dressing up a human cadaver and creating a fictitious story around a man who didn’t really exist.  This whole thing was an attempt to manipulate the opposition.  Unfortunately for me (and my son), I believe this analogy may have gone completely over the judge’s head. In the past few weeks, however, I have thought more and more about this analogy and I think it may resonate with many who have been in similar situations with psychopaths.

The Plot:

Though Luc is most certainly “the evil” in this scenario, his deception against me was like his very own version of “Operation Mincemeat”.  His objective was money.  He had run through his previous victim and needed a new income source.  He would find his target, listen to her hopes and dreams, and create the story for his “cadaver” based on her version of Prince Charming.

My Conclusions:

Family Court can be incredibly intrusive.  Many people (who aren’t dealing with psychopath ex’s) likely decide to settle out of court so that they can save themselves the expense and the relentless exposure of their personal lives.  That being said, this “exposure” only really applies if you are playing by the rules.  For example, I provided the court copies of my taxes, bank statements, pay stubs, property information, and a complete history of my education and family background.

Luc, on the other hand, remained “The Man who Never Was” throughout the entire trial.  His lies seemed to evolve and morph as time went on to further prove that not only was he “The Man who Never Was” to the court, I wasn’t even sure if HE knew who he was by the end.  He presented clearly fake tax statement and pay stubs for a job he has never held.  The court, however, accepted these documents as truth and never questioned how a man got to be middle aged without ever having a legitimate job.

The reality of Family Court is ugly.  It takes a special person to be able to see through the smoke and clouds that psychopaths create in the courtroom.  From what I have seen, most judges do not appear equipped (nor do they care enough) to filter through the lies and deceit in order to protect these innocent children.  Why then do we waste the time and money to go through the court system if these psychopaths are not going to be held to the law and forced to present proven and factual information?

A Media Example:

Just as I was pondering the above analogy, one of my friends posted the following link to her Facebook site.

Two American Kids Shipped to France in One of the Worst Custody Decisions. Ever.

While the term “psychopath” was never used in this article, the point that stuck out for me was how Actress Kelly Rutherford explained that she STILL did not know who her ex husband was.  After his U.S. visa was revoked, a judge ordered Kelly Rutherford’s children (American citizens who had been born and raised in the US) to live in France with her ex because he was unable to travel to the US to see them.

Kelly Rutherford likely had the best lawyer money could buy and it didn’t do a bit of good because the lawyer in her case refused to ask the obvious question – “Who ARE you Sir?  And why was your U.S. Visa revoked?”  The State Department refuses to issue this man a new visa.  His lawyer claims that its Rutherford’s fault his visa was revoked.  Even if this were possible, which it’s not because a private citizen can’t cause the US Government to deny someone entry, it doesn’t explain away the fact that this man was not required to present to the court how he made his money and who he really was.

Family Courts in America are in crisis.



20 Comments on "Family Court Theater Presents: The Psychopath as “The Man Who Never Was”"

Trackback | Comments RSS Feed

  1. 20years says:

    I just found this — thanks for posting it. Yes, they lie, lie, lie. And yes, the courts are filled with sociopaths. I would even go so far as to say that much of our court system IS sociopathic. So, since we are swimming in it (like fish swim in water or we are breathing in the air we don’t see nor think about), people do not recognize this!

    Until they finally DO. Like us, we got a very rude awakening. So now, we see it. Bless us for our painful experiences. Bless them, that they have not experienced such pain (yet?) to force an awakening.

    Well…. I just came across a very interesting website which applies to all this, and it applies to where I am with it all now (some distance from it, some of the time, still processing, still trying to see the whole thing with absolute clarity and Truth). So for anyone who is interested, check it out and start at the beginning, with info about the different belief systems we are all caught up in at one level or another:

    whatonearthishappening dot com (dont’ know if I can post an actual link here or not — just type it in).

    It is the introduction which I am hoping to draw your attention to. It is about some of the things which lead to sociopathy and victimization, and a way out of it. As it goes farther, the other stuff on the website is up to you. The first part is really good and applicable to our experiences.

    It is my experience with sociopaths which has led me to this (mental, emotional, spiritual) place I’m in now.

    Lillian… my heart goes out to you. What a tough place you are in. I think you can do it and hang on. I don’t know how old your teenagers are, but you are right to fight for their stability and their relationship with you, their mom. You seem very brave — you have made it this far. Keep going. The love between you and your kids is what matters most.

    cappuccinoqueen… you are right, there is such a beauty in innocence. But there is a different sort of beauty in wisdom. I see the innocent beauty like a butterfly, and the wisdom-beauty as a deeply-rooted tree that is allowed to unfurl to its greatest potential.



    Report this comment

  2. Divorced from Gaslighter says:

    My divorce and custody fight went on for years, with the spath ex continually claiming that I was victimizing him. EX: He hadn’t paid any child support for five solid years, but it was MY fault because I hadn’t given him my new address. When I told the judge that I had a file folder containing the greeting cards he had sent to the children during the five year period, PROVING that he HAD known the children’s address, he went off on a rant saying that the fact that I had the cards PROVED that I had been intercepting his letters to his children.

    Every time I said ANYTHING in court, he twisted it to make me look terrible, and even when I was represented by an attorney, the attorney couldn’t keep up with the endless stream of false accusations. The bottom line is that men who seek custody are always given the benefit of the doubt. A woman who wants custody is ordinary, but a man who wants custody is a super-duper involved daddy!

    The court will NEVER take enough time with the case to figure out which parent is telling a believable story, and which one isn’t.

    By the way, I watched “The Man Who Never Was” on Netflix a few days ago, and it is a very good movie. The book is excellent, too.



    Report this comment

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.